Modeling eukaryotic transcriptional activation

Solving stochastic gene-expression models using queueing theory: A tutorial review

Stochastic models of gene expression are typically formulated using the chemical master equation, which can be solved exactly or approximately using a repertoire of analytical methods. Here, we provide a tutorial review of an alternative approach based on queueing theory that has rarely been used in the literature of gene expression. We discuss the interpretation of six types of infinite-server queues from the angle of stochastic single-cell biology and provide analytical expressions for the stationary and nonstationary distributions and/or moments of mRNA/protein numbers and bounds on the Fano factor. This approach may enable the solution of complex models that have hitherto evaded analytical solution.

A framework for modelling gene regulation which accommodates non-equilibrium mechanisms

BACKGROUND

Gene regulation has, for the most part, been quantitatively analysed by assuming that regulatory mechanisms operate at thermodynamic equilibrium. This formalism was originally developed to analyse the binding and unbinding of transcription factors from naked DNA in eubacteria. Although widely used, it has made it difficult to understand the role of energy-dissipating, epigenetic mechanisms, such as DNA methylation, nucleosome remodelling and post-translational modification of histones and co-regulators, which act together with transcription factors to regulate gene expression in eukaryotes.

RESULTS

Here, we introduce a graph-based framework that can accommodate non-equilibrium mechanisms. A gene-regulatory system is described as a graph, which specifies the DNA microstates (vertices), the transitions between microstates (edges) and the transition rates (edge labels). The graph yields a stochastic master equation for how microstate probabilities change over time. We show that this framework has broad scope by providing new insights into three very different ad hoc models, of steroid-hormone responsive genes, of inherently bounded chromatin domains and of the yeast PHO5 gene. We find, moreover, surprising complexity in the regulation of PHO5, which has not yet been experimentally explored, and we show that this complexity is an inherent feature of being away from equilibrium. At equilibrium, microstate probabilities do not depend on how a microstate is reached but, away from equilibrium, each path to a microstate can contribute to its steady-state probability. Systems that are far from equilibrium thereby become dependent on history and the resulting complexity is a fundamental challenge. To begin addressing this, we introduce a graph-based concept of independence, which can be applied to sub-systems that are far from equilibrium, and prove that history-dependent complexity can be circumvented when sub-systems operate independently.

CONCLUSIONS

As epigenomic data become increasingly available, we anticipate that gene function will come to be represented by graphs, as gene structure has been represented by sequences, and that the methods introduced here will provide a broader foundation for understanding how genes work.

UBF activates RNA polymerase I transcription by stimulating promoter escape

Ribosomal RNA gene transcription by RNA polymerase I (Pol I) is the driving force behind ribosome biogenesis, vital to cell growth and proliferation. The key activator of Pol I transcription, UBF, has been proposed to act by facilitating recruitment of Pol I and essential basal factor SL1 to rDNA promoters. However, we found no evidence that UBF could stimulate recruitment or stabilization of the pre-initiation complex (PIC) in reconstituted transcription assays. In this, UBF is fundamentally different from archetypal activators of transcription. Our data imply that UBF exerts its stimulatory effect on RNA synthesis, after PIC formation, promoter opening and first phosphodiester bond formation and before elongation. We provide evidence to suggest that UBF activates transcription in the transition between initiation and elongation, at promoter escape by Pol I. This novel role for UBF in promoter escape would allow control of rRNA synthesis at active rDNA repeats, independent of and complementary to the promoter-specific targeting of SL1 and Pol I during PIC assembly. We posit that stimulation of promoter escape could be a general mechanism of activator function.

Functional interaction among thyroid-specific transcription factors: Pax8 regulates the activity of Hex promoter

The transcription factor Hex is expressed in the thyroid follicular cells (TFC) and in several other cell types. In TFC, Hex contributes to the control of the tissue-specific gene expression. By means of RT-PCR assays we found a correlation between the Hex and Pax8 (a different tissue-specific transcription factor, expressed in TFC) mRNA levels in normal and neoplastic thyroid tissues. This finding suggested the presence of a functional correlation between the two transcription factors. Therefore, we tested whether Pax8 regulates the transcriptional activity of Hex promoter. Indeed, by using cotransfection experiments in non-thyroidal cells, we show that increasing doses of Pax8 expression vector elicited a dose-dependent increase of the transcriptional activity of Hex promoter. Accordingly, gel-retardation assays indicated that in the Hex promoter are present several Pax8 binding sites. The Pax8 activating effect on Hex promoter was further increased by the contemporary presence of Hex protein. In fact, cotransfection of both Hex and Pax8 expression vectors doubled the transcriptional activity of Hex promoter with respect to the condition in which the Pax8 expression vector only was transfected. In addition, we show that also the transcriptional cofactor APE/Ref-1 cooperated with Pax8 for upregulation of Hex promoter activity. These findings, together with other published data, suggest that a network of functional interactions between transcriptional regulators is present in TFC.

Thyroid-specific transcription factors control Hex promoter activity

The homeobox-containing gene Hex is expressed in several cell types, including thyroid follicular cells, in which it regulates the transcription of tissue- specific genes. In this study the regulation of Hex promoter activity was investigated. Using co- transfection experiments, we demonstrated that the transcriptional activity of the Hex gene promoter in rat thyroid FRTL-5 cells is approximately 10-fold greater than that observed in HeLa and NIH 3T3 cell lines (which do not normally express the Hex gene). To identify the molecular mechanisms underlying these differences, we evaluated the effect of the thyroid- specific transcription factor TTF-1 on the Hex promoter activity. TTF-1 produced 3-4-fold increases in the Hex promoter activity. Gel- retardation assays and mutagenesis experiments revealed the presence of functionally relevant TTF-1 binding sites in the Hex promoter region. These in vitro data may also have functional relevance in vivo, since a positive correlation between TTF-1 and Hex mRNAs was demonstrated in human thyroid tissues by means of RT-PCR analysis. The TTF-1 effect, however, is not sufficient to explain the difference in Hex promoter activity between FRTL-5 and cells that do not express the Hex gene. For this reason, we tested whether Hex protein is able to activate the Hex promoter. Indeed, co-transfection experiments indicate that Hex protein is able to increase the activity of its own promoter in HeLa cells approximately 4-fold. TTF-1 and Hex effects are additive: when transfected together in HeLa cells, the Hex promoter activity is increased 6-7-fold. Thus, the contemporary presence of both TTF-1 and Hex could be sufficient to explain the higher transcriptional activity of the Hex promoter in thyroid cells with respect to cell lines that do not express the Hex gene. These findings demonstrate the existence of direct cross-regulation between thyroid-specific transcription factors.

A step subsequent to preinitiation complex assembly at the ribosomal RNA gene promoter is rate limiting for human RNA polymerase I-dependent transcription

The assembly, disassembly, and functional properties of transcription preinitiation complexes (PICs) of human RNA polymerase I (Pol I) play a crucial role in the regulation of rRNA gene expression. To study the factors and processes involved, an immobilized-promoter template assay has been developed that allows the isolation from nuclear extracts of functional PICs, which support accurate initiation of transcription. Immunoblotting of template-bound factors showed that these complexes contained the factors required to support initiation of transcription, SL1, upstream binding factor (UBF), and Pol I. We have demonstrated that, throughout a single round of transcription, SL1 and UBF remain promoter bound. Moreover, the promoter-bound SL1 and UBF retain the ability to function in transcription initiation. SL1 has a central role in the stable association of the PIC with the promoter DNA. The polymerase component of the PIC is released from the promoter during transcription yet is efficiently recycled and able to reinitiate from "poised" promoters carrying SL1 and UBF, since the PICs captured on the immobilized templates sustained multiple rounds of transcription. Kinetic analyses of initiation of transcription by Pol I revealed that Pol I-dependent transcription is rate limited in a step subsequent to recruitment and assembly of Pol I PICs. The rate of RNA synthesis is primarily determined by the rates at which the polymerase initiates transcription and escapes the promoter, referred to as promoter clearance. This rate-limiting step in Pol I transcription is likely to be a major target in the regulation of rRNA gene expression.

Mechanism for a transcriptional activator that works at the isomerization step

Transcriptional activators in prokaryotes have been shown to stimulate different steps in the initiation process including the initial binding of RNA polymerase (RNAP) to the promoter and a postbinding step known as the isomerization step. Evidence suggests that activators that affect initial binding can work by a cooperative binding mechanism by making energetically favorable contacts with RNAP, but the mechanism by which activators affect the isomerization step is unclear. A well-studied example of an activator that normally exerts its effect exclusively on the isomerization step is the bacteriophage lambda cI protein (lambdacI), which has been shown genetically to interact with the C-terminal region of the final sigma(70) subunit of RNAP. We show here that the interaction between lambdacI and final sigma can stimulate transcription even when the relevant portion of final sigma is transplanted to another subunit of RNAP. This activation depends on the ability of lambdacI to stabilize the binding of the transplanted final sigma moiety to an ectopic -35 element. Based on these and previous findings, we discuss a simple model that explains how an activator's ability to stabilize the binding of an RNAP subdomain to the DNA can account for its effect on either the initial binding of RNAP to a promoter or the isomerization step.

Evolutionary conserved mechanism of transcriptional repression by even-skipped

Even-skipped (Eve) is a transcriptional repressor involved in segment formation in Drosophila melano-gaster. In order to gain further insights into the mechanism of action of Eve we tested whether it would function as a transcriptional repressor in mammalian cells. We found that Eve was indeed a potent repressor in two different mammalian cell types and at several promoters. In vitro transcription assays confirmed that Eve directly represses transcription initiation when specifically targeted to a promoter. We also found that, unlike the case with transcriptional activators, Eve does not repress transcription synergistically. Analysis of the effect of Eve on preinitiation complex assembly in a crude HeLa cell nuclear extract demonstrated that the Eve repression domain functions by preventing the assembly of TFIID with the promoter. Our data support the hypothesis that Eve contains an active repression domain that functions specifically to prevent preinitiation complex formation.

Glutamine-rich domains activate transcription in yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Activation domains of eukaryotic transcription factors can be classified into at least three distinct types based on their amino acid composition: acidic, proline-rich, and glutamine-rich. Acidic activators, such as yeast GAL4 and GCN4 and herpes simplex virus VP16, have been shown to stimulate transcription in various higher and lower eukaryotic cells. Similarly, proline-rich activators also function in both mammalian and yeast cells. These activators are regarded to possess "universal" activating potentials. By contrast, several studies have suggested that glutamine-rich activators such as human Sp1 are active in higher (mammalian) but not lower (yeast) eukaryotic cells. One interpretation is that lower eukaryotic cells lack a critical co-factor necessary for a glutamine-rich domain. This reasoning is counter-intuitive because many native yeast activator proteins contain glutamine-rich domains. Here, we have investigated the activity of a glutamine-rich GAL4-Sp1 domain A (Sp1A) hybrid protein in yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We show that GAL4-Sp1A activated a GAL1-lacZ reporter by more than 200-fold over basal when the reporter was carried on a 2mu vector. The generality of the Sp1A results is supported by our finding that yeast glutamine-rich domains from HAP2 and MCM1 are also transcriptionally active in S. cerevisiae. Interestingly, we found that glutamine-rich domains are considerably less potent when responsive promoters (i.e. GAL1-lacZ) are integrated into yeast chromosome. Thus our results segregate the inherent transcriptional activity of a glutamine-rich domain in yeast S. cerevisiae from its apparent lack of activity when assayed on chromosomally embedded promoters.

CCG1/TAF(II)250 regulates epidermal growth factor receptor gene transcription in cell cycle mutant ts13

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) plays a critical role in normal growth and its overexpression is associated with several types of cancer. To learn more about regulation of the expression of this important receptor, we investigated the role of the TAF(II)250 subunit of transcription factor IID in the transcription of the EGFR gene. The EGFR gene has a TATA-less promoter and TAF(II)250 has previously been shown to have an important regulatory role in such promoters. The study was performed in the ts13 hamster cell line which has a temperature-sensitive mutation in the CCG1 gene that encodes TAF(II)250. At the nonpermissive temperature, the transcription of a few cell cycle-dependent genes is depressed in ts13 cells while global RNA synthesis is unaffected. Using this model system, we found that EGFR promoter-driven luciferase expression in transiently transfected ts13 cells decreased 8, 25, and 50-fold after 12, 24, and 48 hours, respectively, at the nonpermissive temperature. The decrease was partially rescued by cotransfection with the wild-type CCG1 gene. The expression of endogenous EGFR also appeared to be regulated by TAF(II)250--the maximum binding capacity of ts13 cells for 125I-labeled EGF decreased approximately twofold when incubated for 2 days at the nonpermissive temperature. Placing these studies in the context of the current understanding of the TFIID transcription complex, we speculate that selective stimulation of EGFR gene transcription may be mediated by TAF(II)250 interaction with enhancer-bound activators and the basal transcription machinery.

The host factor polyhedrin promoter binding protein (PPBP) is involved in transcription from the baculovirus polyhedrin gene promoter

Hypertranscription and temporal expression from the Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis (AcNPV) baculovirus polyhedrin promoter involves an alpha-amanitin-resistant RNA polymerase and requires a trans-acting viral factor(s). We previously reported that a 30-kDa host factor, polyhedrin promoter binding protein (PPBP), binds with unusual affinity, specificity, and stability to the transcriptionally important motif AATAAATAAGTATT within the polyhedrin (polh) initiator promoter and also displays coding strand-specific single-stranded DNA (ssDNA)-binding activity (S. Burma, B. Mukherjee, A. Jain, S. Habib, and S. E. Hasnain, J. Biol. Chem. 269:2750-2757, 1994; B. Mukherjee, S. Burma, and S. E. Hasnain, J. Biol. Chem. 270:4405-4411, 1995). We now present evidence which indicates that an additional factor(s) is involved in stabilizing PPBP-duplex promoter and PPBP-ssDNA interactions. TBP (TATA box binding protein) present in Spodoptera frugiperda (Sf9) cells is characteristically distinct from PPBP and does not interact directly with the polh promoter. Replacement of PPBP cognate sequences within the polh promoter with random nucleotides abolished PPBP binding in vitro and also failed to express the luciferase reporter gene in vivo. Phosphocellulose fractions of total nuclear extract from virus-infected cells which support in vitro transcription from the polh promoter contain PPBP activity. When PPBP was sequestered by the presence of oligonucleotides containing PPBP cognate sequence motifs, in vitro transcription of a C-free reporter cassette was affected but was restored by the exogenous addition of nuclear extract containing PPBP. When PPBP was mopped out in vivo by a plasmid carrying PPBP cognate sequence present in trans, polh promoter-driven expression of the luciferase reporter was abolished, demonstrating that binding of PPBP to the polh promoter is essential for transcription.

Proposed mechanism for the stabilization of nuclear receptor DNA binding via protein dimerization

Hepatocyte nuclear factor 4 (HNF-4) defines a new subgroup of nuclear receptors that exist in solution and bind DNA exclusively as homodimers. We recently showed that the putative ligand binding domain (LBD) of HNF-4 is responsible for dimerization in solution and prevents heterodimerization with other receptors. In this report, the role of the LBD in DNA binding by HNF-4 is further investigated by using electrophoretic mobility shift analysis. A comparison of constructs containing either the DNA binding domain (DBD) alone or the DBD plus the LBD of HNF-4 showed that dimerization via the DBD was sufficient to provide nearly the full DNA binding affinity of the full-length HNF-4. In contrast, dimerization via the DBD was not sufficient to produce a stable protein-DNA complex, whereas dimerization via the LBD increased the half-life of the complex by at least 100-fold. Circular permutation analysis showed that full-length HNF-4 bent DNA by approximately 80 degrees while the DBD bent DNA by only 24 degrees. Nonetheless, analysis of other constructs indicated that the increase in stability afforded by the LBD could be explained only partially by an increased ability to bend DNA. Coimmunoprecipitation studies, on the other hand, showed that dimerization via the LBD produced a protein-protein complex that was much more stable than the corresponding protein-DNA complex. These results led us to propose a model in which dimerization via the LBD stabilizes the receptor on DNA by converting an energetically favorable two-step dissociation event into an energetically unfavorable single-step event. Implications of this one-step model for other nuclear receptors are discussed.

Synergistic and promoter-selective activation of transcription by recruitment of transcription factors TFIID and TFIIB

Eukaryotic transcriptional activators may function by stimulating formation of RNA polymerase II preinitiation complexes at the core promoter of genes. In this case, their mode of action will intrinsically depend on how these complexes assemble on promoters in living cells, an issue that remains largely unexplored. Here we show that in yeast the basal transcription machinery is brought to the promoter in the form of at least two subcomplexes, TFIID and a complex comprising TFIIB and other essential components. Individual recruitment of either complex by artificial contact with a transcriptionally inactive, sequence-specific DNA-binding protein suffices to trigger transcriptional activation from a wild-type core promoter bearing the appropriate binding site. In contrast, activation from a promoter containing a weakened TATA element is only observed upon recruitment of TFIID. Tethering TFIIB on that promoter remains without effect, but the simultaneous recruitment of both components leads to strong synergistic activation. These findings suggest a simple mechanism whereby two activators that contact distinct subcomplexes of the basal machinery may stimulate transcription synergistically and differentially depending on the nature of the promoter.

Unusual oligomerization required for activity of NtrC, a bacterial enhancer-binding protein

Nitrogen regulatory protein C (NtrC) contacts a bacterial RNA polymerase from distant enhancers by means of DNA loops and activates transcription by allowing polymerase to gain access to the template DNA strand. It was shown that NtrC from Salmonella typhimurium must build large oligomers to activate transcription. In contrast to eukaryotic enhancer-binding proteins, most of which must bind directly to DNA, some NtrC dimers were bound solely by protein-protein interactions. NtrC oligomers were visualized with scanning force microscopy. Evidence of their functional importance was provided by showing that some inactive non-DNA-binding and DNA-binding mutant forms of NtrC can cooperate to activate transcription.

The TAF(II)250 subunit of TFIID has histone acetyltransferase activity

The transcription initiation factor TFIID is a multimeric protein complex composed of TATA box-binding protein (TBP) and many TBP-associated factors (TAF(II)s). TAF(II)s are important cofactors that mediate activated transcription by providing interaction sites for distinct activators. Here, we present evidence that human TAF(II)250 and its homologs in Drosophila and yeast have histone acetyltransferase (HAT) activity in vitro. HAT activity maps to the central, most conserved portion of dTAF(II)230 and yTAF(II)130. The HAT activity of dTAF(II)230 resembles that of yeast and human GCN5 in that it is specific for histones H3 and H4 in vitro. Our findings suggest that targeted histone acetylation at specific promoters by TAF(II)250 may be involved in mechanisms by which TFIID gains access to transcriptionally repressed chromatin.

Negative regulation of gene expression in eukaryotes

Gene expression is mainly regulated at the transcription level. For the specific regulation of gene expression, two components are required: one is the cis-element that is the short DNA sequence in the regulatory region of the gene, and the other is the trans-acting factor that binds to the cis-element. This complex then interacts with the initiation complex, including RNA polymerase II, and regulates the gene expression. Although many elements and factors are reported as involved in the gene activation, little is known about the negative regulation of gene expression. In this study, analyses of the regulatory regions in glutathione transferase P and growth inhibitory factor genes are presented, and the mechanisms of the negative regulation are discussed.

Activation domain-mediated enhancement of activator binding to chromatin in mammalian cells

DNA binding by transcriptional activators is typically an obligatory step in the activation of gene expression. Activator binding and subsequent steps in transcription are repressed by genomic chromatin. Studies in vitro have suggested that overcoming this repression is an important function of some activation domains. Here we provide quantitative in vivo evidence that the activation domain of GAL4-VP16 can increase the affinity of GAL4 for its binding site on genomic DNA in mammalian cells. Moreover, the VP16 activation domain has a much greater stimulatory effect on expression from a genomic reporter gene than on a transiently transfected reporter gene, where factor binding is more permissive. We found that not all activation domains showed a greater activation potential in a genomic context, suggesting that only some activation domains can function in vivo to alleviate the repressive effects of chromatin. These data demonstrate the importance of activation domains in relieving chromatin-mediated repression in vivo and suggest that one way they function is to increase binding of the activator itself.

Activator-dependent regulation of transcriptional pausing on nucleosomal templates

Promoter-proximal pausing during transcriptional elongation is an important way of regulating many diverse genes, including human c-myc and c-fos, some HIV genes, and the Drosophila heat shock loci. To characterize the mechanisms that regulate pausing, we have established an in vitro system using the human hsp7O gene. We demonstrate that nucleosome formation increases by >100-fold the duration of a transcriptional pause on the human hsp7O gene in vitro at the same location as pausing is observed in vivo. Readthrough of this pause is increased by an activator that contains the human heat shock factor 1 (HSF1) transcriptional activation domains. Maximal effect of the activator requires that the system be supplemented with fractions that have hSWI/SNF activity, which has been shown previously to alter nucleosome structure. No significant readthrough is observed in the absence of activator, and neither the activator nor the hSWI/SNF fraction affected elongation on naked DNA; therefore, these results suggest that an activator can cause increased readthrough of promoter-proximal pausing by decreasing the inhibitory effect of nucleosomes on transcriptional elongation.

Characterization of the interaction between the acidic activation domain of VP16 and the RNA polymerase II initiation factor TFIIB

Contact between a transcriptional activator and one or more components of the RNA polymerase II transcription initiation machinery is generally believed important for activators to function. Several different molecular targets have been suggested for direct contact by herpes simplex virus virion protein VP16, including the general initiation factor TFIIB. In this report we have used several strategies to critically assess this interaction between VP16 and TFIIB. Affinity columns of VP16 bound TFIIB activity from HeLa cell extracts and the binding was reduced by mutations in the activation domain of VP16. In assays of direct binding, VP16 bound recombinant human TFIIB but not Drosophila or yeast TFIIB. Unlike binding from an extract, however, we found that the interaction between VP16 and recombinant human TFIIB was not affected by mutations in VP16 that reduce transactivation. Point mutations within human TFIIB that reduce transactivation by VP16 have been shown to reduce VP16 binding, but we show here that these same mutations critically affect both the important TBP-TFIIB interaction and the ability of TFIIB to support activator-independent basal transcription in vitro. Taken together our results suggest more evidence is needed to support the notion that TFIIB is a functionally important target for the activator VP16.

Metazoan rDNA enhancer acts by making more genes transcriptionally active

Enhancers could, in principle, function by increasing the rate of reinitiation on individual adjacent active promoters or by increasing the probability that an adjacent promoter is activated for transcription. We have addressed this issue for the repetitive metazoan rDNA enhancer by microinjecting Xenopus oocytes with enhancer-less and enhancer-bearing genes and determining by EM the frequency that each gene type forms active transcription units and their transcript density. We use conditions where transcription requires the normal rDNA promoter and is stimulated 30-50-fold by the enhancer. (In contrast, at saturating template conditions as used in previous EM studies, an aberrant mode of transcription is activated that is not affected by the rDNA enhancer or by the generally recognized rDNA promoter). The active transcription units on enhancer-less genes are found to be as densely packed with nascent transcripts and polymerases as those on enhancer-bearing genes and on the endogenous rRNA genes. Significantly, the enhancer-bearing genes are approximately 30-50-fold more likely to form such active transcription units than enhancer-less genes, consistent with their amounts of transcript. Complementary studies confirm that the enhancer does not affect elongation rate, the stability of the transcription complex, or transcript half-life. These data demonstrate that the repetitive metazoan rDNA enhancer causes more genes to be actively transcribed and does not alter the reinitiation rate on individual active genes.

Accessibility control of antigen-receptor variable-region gene assembly: role of cis-acting elements

Antigen receptor variable region genes are assembled from germline variable (V), diversity (D), and joining (J) gene segments. This process requires expression of V(D)J recombinase activity, and "accessibility" of variable gene segments to this recombinase. The exact mechanism by which variable gene segments become accessible during development is not known. However, several studies have shown that cis-acting elements that regulate transcription may also function to regulate accessibility. Here we review the evidence that transcriptional promoters, enhancers, and silencers are involved in regulation of accessibility. The manner in which these elements may combine to regulate accessibility is addressed. In addition, current and potential strategies for identifying and analyzing cis-acting elements that mediate locus accessibility are discussed.

A role for activator-mediated TFIIB recruitment in diverse aspects of transcriptional regulation

BACKGROUND

Transcription by RNA polymerase II in eukaryotic cells requires the ordered assembly of general transcription factors on the promoter to form a preinitiation complex. Transcriptional activator proteins (activators) stimulate transcription by increasing the rate and/or extent of preinitiation complex assembly. We have shown previously that acidic activators increase the stable association of TFIIB on the promoter, a process we refer to as 'recruitment'. In this study, we provide evidence that diverse activators facilitate TFIIB assembly by a related mechanism. We then investigate the activator-mediated assembly of TFIIB with regard to two aspects of transcription: the distance-dependence of activator function, and reinitiation.

RESULTS

We have previously described amino-acid-substitution mutants of TFIIB that are able to support an activator-independent basal level of transcription but do not respond to acidic activators. We now show that these mutants also do not respond to other classes of activators. We demonstrate that this defect is due to a failure of the activators to recruit the mutant TFIIB to the promoter. Activators often lose activity as their distance from the initiation site is increased. We show that this impaired transcriptional activity correlates with a decrease in TFIIB recruitment. Finally, we find that following the initiation of transcription, TFIIB dissociates from the promoter, requiring the activator-mediated reassembly of TFIIB in the preinitiation complex for each new round of transcription.

CONCLUSION

We have provided evidence that diverse activators recruit TFIIB to the promoter by a related mechanism. This central step in transcriptional activation is sensitive to promoter architecture, and is required for each new round of transcription.

Stimulation of RNA polymerase II transcription initiation by recruitment of TBP in vivo

Eukaryotic transcriptional activators may stimulate RNA polymerase II activity by promoting assembly of preinitiation complexes on promoters through their interactions with one or more components of the basal machinery. On the basis of its central role in initiating transcription-complex formation upon binding to the TATA box, the general transcription factor TFIID, which includes the TATA-binding protein (TBP) and several TBP-associated factors, has been implicated as a target for activators. Consistent with this idea, an increasing number of activators have been reported to bind directly to TBP. To assess the functional importance of these in vitro interactions for transcriptional regulation in vivo, we made use of a novel strategy in yeast to show that a physical interaction with TBP is sufficient for a sequence-specific DNA-binding protein to increase initiation of transcription by RNA polymerase II. These results imply that binding of TFIID to promoter elements is a limiting step in transcription complex assembly in vivo.

Activator-induced conformational change in general transcription factor TFIIB

Transcriptional activator proteins (activators) function, at least in part, by increasing preinitiation complex assembly (for reviews see refs 1-4). Previous studies have shown that an acidic activator forms a contact with the general transcription factor TFIIB (refs 5-7) and recruits it into the preinitiation complex. Mutational studies indicate that this interaction between the acidic activator and TFIIB is required for transcriptional stimulation. We show here that the acidic activator-TFIIB interaction has an additional function in preinitiation complex assembly. We provide evidence that in native TFIIB the amino- and carboxy-terminal domains are engaged in an intramolecular interaction. The acidic activator disrupts this intramolecular interaction to expose binding sites for general transcription factors that enter the preinitiation complex through association with TFIIB. Thus, the acidic activator induces a conformational change in TFIIB that drives preinitiation complex assembly forward.

Synergistic activation of transcription by bacteriophage lambda cI protein and E. coli cAMP receptor protein

Two heterologous prokaryotic activators, the bacteriophage lambda cI protein (lambda cI) and the Escherichia coli cyclic AMP receptor protein (CRP), were shown to activate transcription synergistically from an artificial promoter bearing binding sites for both proteins. The synergy depends on a functional activation (positive control) surface on each activator. These results imply that both proteins interact directly with RNA polymerase and thus suggest a precise mechanism for transcriptional synergy: the interaction of two activators with two distinct surfaces of RNA polymerase.